Are there really 37 possible outcomes?

[vladir]

Thanks luck of the irish. Similar to what I got too.

[LuckoftheIrish]

Thanks luck of the irish. Similar to what I got too.

Thank you for posting your stats.  And our results are very close

[falkor]

Does anyone know if all splits or streets could hit without a repeat?

[LuckoftheIrish]

Does anyone know if all splits or streets could hit without a repeat?

Yes all splits and all streets can hit without a repeat. I tested splits a while back.

[falkor]

ok thanks

[falkor]

..
23    29
24    16
25    5
26    3
..
The most unique numbers in a row was 25 (The 26 means it hit on the 26th spin, so 25 unique numbers in a row) and this happened only 3 times.

They say order isn't important, but would be interesting to check out these sets to see how far away the repeating number was from it's initial appearance. For example, was it the most recent number (or 2nd most recent number) that hit? Or was the repeating number one of the ones that first appeared much earlier?

[winkel]

They say order isn't important, but would be interesting to check out these sets to see how far away the repeating number was from it's initial appearance.

read the most simple statistic of the binomial distribution table and you will have the answer!

For example, was it the most recent number (or 2nd most recent number) that hit? Or was the repeating number one of the ones that first appeared much earlier?

You have to learn a lot about the distribution

[falkor]

I don't wish to see tables based on probability, but actual test results based on live roulette data. You don't learn by somebody else's theory - but by your own testing and observation.

[winkel]

I don't wish to see tables based on probability, but actual test results based on live roulette data. You don't learn by somebody else's theory - but by your own testing and observation.

Do you know that results have to be the same? The only diffrence is that your datas are too less to be exact. If you find something is in front after a million spins, it has to be in the back in the next 1 million spins.And that will eat your money.

It would be much smarter to declare the appearances that came less as favorit for the next spins.

[falkor]

Well, according to the statisticians roulette cannot be beaten due to gambler's fallacy, yet I already proved it can be beaten by playing the waiting game, so why study their work... 1 million spins is more than enough to test a system for viable play during our lifetimes. And if my 500 BR got eaten once any typical winning system that passes such a test would guarantee several K before or after that event.

I agree with less/more vs. order, but the strategy I have in mind for numbers would win on the first repeat, so that kind of data (less/more) doesn't apply to what we are testing here unless you are tracking hundreds of spins prior, which again I haven't got time for.

[winkel]

..., yet I already proved it can be beaten by playing the waiting game,

You are seriously telling us, that waiting is the way to win at Roulette? Of course you wouldn´t lose during Waiting, that´s correct. But if you don´t bet you will win neither.

[Azim]

George...I read it. I think "oops" was better (only pullin yer leg)
To have any idea if your 18 was of any use you would of have to of been tracking nested 37s for a while.  The trend could of been (h
it) 27,27,26,25,26,25,24,23,24,23,24,23,22,21
or 21,21,20,21,22,22,23,24,25,24,23
Its a lot of tracking with little certainty.
As I have said...number six in his 2011 era in VLS goes into great depth. You do have to tolerate endless interuptions from Herb (Caleb/snowman/xander/real)

Turner,

Did you end up testing this at all..  The nested 37's?

[Azim]

This has caught my attention for a while now.

I have been thinking and can't figure a way out, but it sure has merit. However it's tracking will be worse than GUT.  Colbster, were you thinking on the same line as I am now:

If we track 1000 spins in reality that's  964 spin cycle of 37 (1000 - 36). (Turner is my number right?)

Unless there is a bias RNG or Wheel whichever you want to look at. There will be 24 number's hit and 10 not hit in each cycle?
The key to your thinking is  to catch the 24 number's and play them to repeat up to a certain cycle?

Is that right?

[Colbster]

Every spin occupies a unique place in each of 37 different spins (actually, it's infinite but that doesn't help us).  For instance, the next spin is the first spin of a 37-spin cycle, but it is also the 12th spin of a cycle that began 11 spins ago, the 24th spin of a cycle that began 23 spins, and the last spin in a 37 spin cycle that started 36 spins ago.  Thus, tracking is constant.  That said, we know that a certain number of spins will not show and as repeats occur, we can quantify how many won't hit this cycle.  As we approach that number, the odds can be understood to turn in our favor as there cannot possibly be 8 unique numbers hit over the next 4 spins (as an example).  It is just a matter of grabbing those bets that give us positive expected returns.

[Azim]

I get it. 

What you saying is if we had people joining in at the table after every spin. what could be your spin 50 could be someone else's 30th spin.

Which would make it a hell lot of tracking at the tables, would it not?